George Hammond wrote:

"TMG" wrote in message
...

George Hammond wrote:

sniff, sniff smells like , cowardice.

You spend a lot of time at this not to have the balls to step into

traffic.

Oh well, I guess furious typing is good too.


[Hammond]
On a good day I can hit 75 words per minute.


True, but you have to subtract out the misspelled and misused ones -
same as at the Katherine Gibbs Academy.

P.S. - Good job not taking the bait on being ball-less. You're coming
along nicely.

"TMG" wrote in message
...
George Hammond wrote:

"TMG" wrote in message
...

George Hammond wrote:

sniff, sniff smells like , cowardice.

You spend a lot of time at this not to have the balls to step into

traffic.

Oh well, I guess furious typing is good too.


[Hammond]
On a good day I can hit 75 words per minute.


True, but you have to subtract out the misspelled and misused ones -
same as at the Katherine Gibbs Academy.

P.S. - Good job not taking the bait on being ball-less. You're coming
along nicely.

[Hammond]
On another front.... someone on talk.origins clued me in to a NG
called alt.talk.creationism. Now these people should actually be
supportive of SPOG since spog proves the Biblical Creation.
Problem is Comcast Cable doesn't carry a.t.c. so I have to post
through Google Groups which is a pain involving a 3 hour delay
for it to get back to G.G. where you can read replies... and I
can't post (crosspost) to it from Comcast because they don't
carry it... I can only crosspost from Google to Comcast but
not vice versa.
But anyway... after talking to nothing but the enemy camps for
5 years... maybe I've found some potential supporters... and
politically they actually do have some clout. At one point they
sued the Kansas City board of education and actually won.
Of course many of them don't believe in Evolution (as a
severe over reaction to the fact that Science does not know
that Biblical Creation is ALSO a scientific fact)... but I'll
just have to persuede them that getting Biblical Creation
will solve the problem they are concerned with, without
having to disprove Evolution.
====================================
SCIENTIFIC PROOF OF GOD WEBSITE
1st mirror site:
http://geocities.com/scientific_proof_of_god
2nd mirror site:
http://proof-of-god.freewebsitehosting.com
new site (under construction):
http://home.comcast.net/~proof-of-god
====================================

"R.Schenck" wrote in message
...
"George Hammond" on 01 Sep 2004 posted

snip
Whaddau think I'm suicidal? There's an army of Creationists who
have already taken the Kansas City school board to court
and won. I need an army dummy... I don't plan to be David
fighting Goliath. The only thing the Creatioists don't have is an
argument that will stand up against the Scientists... I have
the weapon they are looking for... a scientific proof of God
and Biblical Creation.

Why do you think proof of god (which, judging from your website, is
something that you infact don't have) equates to proof of biblical
creation? Which biblical creation by the way?

[Hammond]
Hey... didn't anyone ever tell you that if you''re not
qualified to read something you sure as hell aren't
qualified to criticize it.

The theory (discovery actually) proves that
sensory reality (what we see) is a CURVED
VERSION of actual physical reality (what
Physics measures). "Curved" as in the
sense of Einstein's Theory.
This curvature is caused by the Secular Trend
braingrowth deficit (well known, well proven).
This PROVES (rather than argues) that the
brain produces reality... and therefore, the
"advent of the brain" 40,000 years ago
was the "Creation of reality"... which is
identically the Biblical Creation.

Now there it is in simple language... but I
WARN YOU that it cannot be "challenged
in simple language" since there is a hard
scientific proof of it given on my website and
in my published papers posted there that
require ACTUAL SCIENTIFIC EXPERTISE
which you do not have in order to challenge
it.

====================================
SCIENTIFIC PROOF OF GOD WEBSITE
1st mirror site:
http://geocities.com/scientific_proof_of_god
2nd mirror site:
http://proof-of-god.freewebsitehosting.com
new site (under construction):
http://home.comcast.net/~proof-of-god
====================================

"R.Schenck" wrote in message
...
"George Hammond" on 01 Sep 2004 posted



[Hammond]
Hey... I was given to understand there were some real Creationists
on this newsgroup. Where are they? Who are they?

Again, the real creationists, the beleivers, aren't going to be of any
help. They are morons. Lurk for a while and you will see.

[Hammond]
they're smart enough to know that the Biblical Creation is real....
that's a helluva lot smarter than you are.


====================================
SCIENTIFIC PROOF OF GOD WEBSITE
1st mirror site:
http://geocities.com/scientific_proof_of_god
2nd mirror site:
http://proof-of-god.freewebsitehosting.com
new site (under construction):
http://home.comcast.net/~proof-of-god
====================================

"TMG" wrote in message
...
R.Schenck wrote:

"George Hammond" on 01 Sep 2004 posted


"Darrell Stec" wrote in message
...

And yet you said your theory requires one to be a polymath with an IQ
over 200.

He's heard from polymaths with an I.Q. very well into the genius range.
They all say he's flat out wrong. Stupid. Raving. Insane. A loon's loon.

[Hammond]
LOL Name one of them!
BTW... TMG is a well known internet stalker and heckler...
not to be taken seriously... he's been stalking and harrassing me
for a couple of years. To my knowlege he's posted little if anything
on topic and posts only ad hominem personal attacks.
He's a local yokle and I've even had to talk to the police about him.
====================================
SCIENTIFIC PROOF OF GOD WEBSITE
1st mirror site:
http://geocities.com/scientific_proof_of_god
2nd mirror site:
http://proof-of-god.freewebsitehosting.com
new site (under construction):
http://home.comcast.net/~proof-of-god
====================================

"George Hammond" emerged reluctantly from
the curtain and staggered drunkenly up to the mic. In a cracked and
slurred voice he muttered:

[Hammond]
Hey... didn't anyone ever tell you that if you''re not
qualified to read something you sure as hell aren't
qualified to criticize it.

The theory (discovery actually) proves that
sensory reality (what we see) is a CURVED
VERSION of actual physical reality (what
Physics measures). "Curved" as in the
sense of Einstein's Theory.
This curvature is caused by the Secular Trend
braingrowth deficit (well known, well proven).
This PROVES (rather than argues) that the
brain produces reality... and therefore, the
"advent of the brain" 40,000 years ago
was the "Creation of reality"... which is
identically the Biblical Creation.

Now there it is in simple language... but I
WARN YOU that it cannot be "challenged
in simple language" since there is a hard
scientific proof of it given on my website and
in my published papers posted there that
require ACTUAL SCIENTIFIC EXPERTISE
which you do not have in order to challenge
it.

Meep Meep.

--
Phil Roberts | Deedle Doot Doo Dee Dee | http://www.flatnet.net/

I could be wrong here, You could be right
Please forgive me I have sinned - Not on your life
But that's how you want me, But I'll never fear thee
Why you and not me? Tell me Holy Man

George Hammond wrote:
"TMG" wrote in message
...

R.Schenck wrote:


"George Hammond" on 01 Sep 2004 posted



"Darrell Stec" wrote in message
...

And yet you said your theory requires one to be a polymath with an IQ
over 200.

He's heard from polymaths with an I.Q. very well into the genius range.
They all say he's flat out wrong. Stupid. Raving. Insane. A loon's loon.


[Hammond]
LOL Name one of them!

I know at least two of your detractors that had SAT scores of 1600. It
isn't an I.Q. test, but review the following:

http://members.shaw.ca/delajara/GREIQ.html

Now I know (I'm *really* quite certain) that one of them took the SAT in
1979, so you need to you *this* chart:

http://members.shaw.ca/delajara/oldSATIQ.html

Not that you remotely care.

And not that I.Q. is the driver you seem to think....

http://www.webenet.com/genius.htm

On the trip home from the Nobel ceremonies in Stockholm, prize-winning
physicist Richard Feynman stopped in Queens, N.Y., and looked up his
high-school records. "My grades were not as good as I remembered," he
said, "and my I.Q. was 124, considered just above average."
James Gleick. Genius: The Life and Science of Richard Feynman. New York:
Pantheon, 1992

btw - I highly recommend the Gleick book quoted above.

BTW... TMG is a well known internet stalker and heckler...
not to be taken seriously... he's been stalking and harrassing me
for a couple of years. To my knowlege he's posted little if anything
on topic and posts only ad hominem personal attacks.
He's a local yokle and I've even had to talk to the police about him.

Now George, my comment was not remotely an ad hominem (the "personal" is
redundant) attack.

We done playing nice? I thought you wanted everyone to play nice.

"George Hammond" wrote in message news:tVqZc.15781$_g7.11625@attbi_s52...
"TMG" wrote in message
...
George Hammond wrote:


[Hammond]
Hey... I was given to understand there were some real Creationists
on this newsgroup. Where are they? Who are they?

I've heard that there are some real Bible thumping, Fundamentalist,
Genesis believing Creationist Bluebloods on this NG who I thought
it was time to talk to.

I'm looking for the kind of Creationist who wants to sue the U.S.
Department of Education and get the law overturned so that
"God" would have to be taught in the Public School Science
curriculem as a "scientific subject". The discovery of a true
scientific proof of God would be the basis of this lawsuit.

Why not file suit yourself? Do it locally, and it's a really inexpensive
process. Start by filing against the local school district:

[Hammond]
Whaddau think I'm suicidal? There's an army of Creationists who
have already taken the Kansas City school board to court
and won. I need an army dummy... I don't plan to be David
fighting Goliath. The only thing the Creatioists don't have is an
argument that will stand up against the Scientists... I have
the weapon they are looking for... a scientific proof of God
and Biblical Creation.

There is not such thing as scientific proof. What you need is a strong
theory.

If you had done your homework the only possibly viable hypothesis that
is slightly distanced from creationism is intelligent design and that
at the moment has some large gaps in it.

You've got to ask yourself why no one is prepared to support your
views. If someone is religious and/or knowledgable in physics and you
had something valid why wouldnt they support it. In fact if it was
scientific you would easily convince healthy skeptics like myself to
consider your view.

Unfortunatly you are unable to explain your ideas that relates to any
physics concept that is accepted.

Also you won't find any 'creationists' here, only those who have their
own agenda and generaly their own ideas. You are very typical of what
some would call the anti evolutionists. In my many years on this group
I've found that those who oppose evolution rarely agree on anything or
with other so called creationists. Meanwhile those who accept
evolution usualy debate details and agree on the majority of things.

It may take awhile.. but sooner or later
they'll hear about it.

Pop over to the discover instituted and places like that. Find a site
that uses 'minister' type photos of smartly dressed guys smiling with
schmultzy design and any academic qualifications writ large and before
any kind of discussion takes place.

Alternatively try and convince the army of various renegades such as
our beloved Mr Conrad. I would say you fit into his camp as someone
who thinks they have discovered something amazing but for some reason
no one will accept their views. Signs you are in that camp include if
you have a web site you have created that writes about you in the
third person, overly defensive prose and inflated claims that are
repeated many many times over ('man is as old as coal' 'discovered
scientific proof of god'). You get the idea.

Also other signs are posting and running, lack of patience to argue
you points and the good ol' claim you can't explain something at the
moment or it's too compliated etc.

I say you fit the profile.

Stew Dean

"stew dean" wrote in message
om...
"George Hammond" wrote in message
news:tVqZc.15781$_g7.11625@attbi_s52...
"TMG" wrote in message
...
George Hammond wrote:


[Hammond]
Hey... I was given to understand there were some real Creationists
on this newsgroup. Where are they? Who are they?

I've heard that there are some real Bible thumping, Fundamentalist,
Genesis believing Creationist Bluebloods on this NG who I thought
it was time to talk to.

I'm looking for the kind of Creationist who wants to sue the U.S.
Department of Education and get the law overturned so that
"God" would have to be taught in the Public School Science
curriculem as a "scientific subject". The discovery of a true
scientific proof of God would be the basis of this lawsuit.

Why not file suit yourself? Do it locally, and it's a really
inexpensive
process. Start by filing against the local school district:

[Hammond]
Whaddau think I'm suicidal? There's an army of Creationists who
have already taken the Kansas City school board to court
and won. I need an army dummy... I don't plan to be David
fighting Goliath. The only thing the Creatioists don't have is an
argument that will stand up against the Scientists... I have
the weapon they are looking for... a scientific proof of God
and Biblical Creation.

There is not such thing as scientific proof. What you need is a strong
theory.

If you had done your homework the only possibly viable hypothesis that
is slightly distanced from creationism is intelligent design and that
at the moment has some large gaps in it.

[Hammond]
Anyone who would debate "intelligent design" is a high school
dropout.


You've got to ask yourself why no one is prepared to support your
views.

[Hammond]
Same reason no one would support Gregor Mendel's views.

If someone is religious and/or knowledgable in physics and you
had something valid why wouldnt they support it.

[Hammond]
Because they are jealous, not to say deathly afraid, of anyone
who could discover a "scientific proof of God"... and so
are you. And you and they ARE TOTALLY JUSTIFIED
in this fear.


In fact if it was
scientific you would easily convince healthy skeptics like myself to
consider your view.

[Hammond]
Lethal injection is totally scientific, that doesn't mean you
would volunteer.


Unfortunatly you are unable to explain your ideas that relates to any
physics concept that is accepted.

[Hammond]
I'm not here to preach the "acceptable year of the Lord"
smarty pants. I'm here to take names and kick ass.



Also you won't find any 'creationists' here,

[Hammond]
I'll buy that... I'm postinhg to alt.talk.creationism too.

I say you fit the profile.

[Hammond]
Right.... you can't name it but you know it when you see it.

====================================
SCIENTIFIC PROOF OF GOD WEBSITE
1st mirror site:
http://geocities.com/scientific_proof_of_god
2nd mirror site:
http://proof-of-god.freewebsitehosting.com
new site (under construction):
http://home.comcast.net/~proof-of-god
====================================




Stew Dean

"George Hammond" wrote:
An army of Creationists can soon convince the scientists to get thier
feet down off the desk and hang up their cellphones and
get their ass in gear and study it until they DO understand it.
That's what. the Creationsists can supeonea the Scientists,
and when they tell the judge they haven't bothered to read
it, the judge can tell them to read it and give him an answer,
and it better be correct. Now that's what I call action,
and I figure between me and an army of boiling mad
Creationists we ought be able to force somebody to dummy
up and speak straight and do their job.

Hauntingly familiar, isn't it folks?

In another thread, someone accused Ed Conrad of being a paranoid
schizophrenic, but I believe Ed deserves to have a unique mental
disorder named after him. I offer Hammond as the second diagnosed case
of "Conrad's Disease."

--
Dan

"Did you just have a stroke and not tell me?" - Jiminy Glick